SUE BRADFORD
ANOTHER BRAINLESS POWER FREAK EVEN WHEN 80% OF NEW ZEALANDERS DIDNT WANT THE NO SMACKING BILL SHE WENT AHEAD WITH THE HELP OF HELEN CLARK AND HAD IT PASSED INTO LAW.
HAVE A LISTEN TO THIS MOTHER'S VIDEO TALK.
LINK BACK TO CHILD KILLERS
http://cindykiro.blogspot.com/
Dr Kiro asks for a paradigm shift when she reminds us that the care of children is the fundamental responsibility of our government and our communities. You'd think the word family would figure more prominently in that sentence. When the word FAMILY does appear, it seems to be mentioned as an obstacle to get past or as some kind of stationery cupboard that holds documents.
AND THIS THE ANOTHER GREEN PARTY MEMBER WHO SMOKES CANNIBIS TO HELP HIM MAKE DECISIONS FOR US ALL.
NANDOR DOPE SMOKER
NANDORS LIVATATIONS>
Greetings in the name of the Creator,
the Most High JaH Ras Tafari.
Greetings in the name of the Hola Trinity of Life -
the Father, Mother and the Child
I give greetings in the name of His Imperial Majesty
Emperor Haile Selassie I, King of Kings, Lord of Lords,
Conquering Lion of the Tribe of Judah.
I give greetings to the earth that sustains life.
Greetings also to the sky that covers I&I
I give greetings to the forces that guide and protect.
I greet the ancestors.
All praises due to JaH
THIS IS WHAT HE SAID
Cannabis Culture article 2000 October Cannabis law reform -
is the New Zealand government losing its nerve?
Cannabis law reform has been firmly on the agenda in New Zealand since the election of a minority centre-left coalition government last November.
In New Zealand, we have a Prime Minister who has been a supporter of cannabis law reform since 1995. We have a minority government made up of political parties that went into the election promising to review the law. That coalition government is supported by the Green Party, whose policy is to allow personal use, possession and cultivation.
Many people are thinking that the struggle is over, the battle has been won, and that ganja is now free. That is not the case. There is much to do still, but things are looking good.
No instant fines
Fears that the issue would be dropped as soon as the election was over have proved false. There has been an on-going media feeding frenzy around the fact that I have openly admitted using cannabis as a part of my RasTafarian faith, and have said that I will continue to do so as a Green MP.
As expected, the usual suspects have tried to fill the papers with the usual bullshit about how cannabis is the worst thing in the world, and that allowing adults to smoke herbs will turn schoolchildren into junkies. There have even been drug "educationalists" saying that they would rather see young people use heroin than cannabis!
AS WE ALL KNOW CANNABIS CHANGES PEOPLE PLEASE HEAR WHAT THE LION HAS TO SAY ABOUT CANNABIS
Of course truth and common sense will prove the stronger in the end, but we are in a crucial moment. There is a danger that the government will lose its nerve and back away from ending the war on pot.
NANDOR WANTS TO MAKE SMOKING CANNIBIS LEGAL
The other big danger is what kind of reform we will have. While Prime Minister Helen Clarke has said she supports cannabis law reform, what she means is something along the lines of the "instant fines" expiation notice scheme they have in South Australia.
GET RID OF THESE PEOPLE..HELEN CLARK-NANDOR-KIRO-SUE BRADFORD.VOTE THEM OUT AT THE NEXT ELECTION
BREAKING NEWS FROM CYFSWATCH website>Prime Minister Helen Clarks husband Peter Davis removed from the USA for Paedophilia?Thursday, 21.06.2007, 08:07pm (GMT12)
If this is true, then the following is very, very disturbing:
CYFSWATCH have been advised that Peter Davis, the husband to Prime Minister Helen Clark, was allegedly removed from the United States some months ago as a result of being caught engaging in Paedophilia with a male minor.
Prime Minister Helen Clark has apparently been aware of this alleged incident for some months, and has reportedly worked very hard to expunge any documentation relating to the alleged incident.
According to our source, all records pertaining to the event have been either destroyed or blanked out, both in New Zealand, and the USA.
CYFSWATCH have been told that a number of officials both in New Zealand and the USA are apparently aware of the incident, and have allegedly been silenced.
If anyone has any information on this alleged issue that they would like to anonymously post to the CYFSWATCH website, we would be happy to publish it.
If the same Prime Minister who so readily supported the anti-smacking legislation because of the "abuse" of children, has then gone on to suppress the alleged sexual assault by her husband of a male minor, then this country is in bigger trouble than we thought.
GO HERE TO VIEW CYFSWATCH.HELEN CLARK TRIED TO HAVE THIS SITE CLOSED DOWN
Loading...
3 comments:
Smacking bill simply avoids addressing the real problems
The Press | Tuesday, 27 March 2007
Email a Friend | Printable View | Have Your SayRelated Links
• Subscribe to Archivestuff
• Have your say
``It's the most talked about political issue of the year,'' trilled a breathless TV3 reporter. And it remained in the top three news items for the rest of the week before last, and could surface again this week.
In case you are wondering, it wasn't the news that New Zealand's economic growth rate is slowing, or that new productivity figures show ours are the worst in 20 years and are only half as good as when Labour came to power in 1999.
The most talked about political issue wasn't the wage gap between us and Australia that just keeps widening, or the figures that show skills continue to migrate there seeking higher remuneration. Nor was it the fact that several secondary centres seem unable to get competent medical specialists, or, one might add, top cops who could run a slide rule over local police behaviour.
No, the really big issue that had the TV3 reporter so engrossed was the smacking bill. It's the sort of issue lazy people dream of when they don't want to get their heads around things that really matter – those that affect the sort of society we pass to our children. Escapism, political tomfoolery, ignoring the herd of elephants stampeding into our room – this country seems proud of its capacity to overlook uncomfortable realities. Given that our educational system has given up teaching the sorts of skills that would help people come to grips with the economic challenges of life, we shouldn't be surprised.
So much hot air has been spouted about the smacking bill that no-one now knows what Green MP Sue Bradford's bill really means.
At first it seemed to introduce an absolute ban on even a light smack. The Prime Minister, Helen Clark, whipped the Labour caucus into line to stop smacking, despite having promised in 2005 that her party would not ban it.
But now we are told that Clark's support for the bill was because it dealt with people ``who thrash and beat children''.
Activity of that kind is covered by other legislation. So what, precisely, will change in practice if the Bradford bill passes? Nothing it seems.
``A lot of people think it is an anti-smacking bill and that it bans smacking,'' Bradford belatedly said. ``But that has not been my intention.'' Really? So what is this most talked about political issue of the year? Nothing more than some sort of fuzzy, unenforceable homily to the public against domestic violence, which isn't tolerated under existing law anyway.
So weeks of parliamentary time and money have been spent debating something the meaning of which not even the bill's proponents are clear about.
If anyone thinks it will stop the family violence that is part of the culture of the feral underclass whom this Government's policies keep breeding, forget it. Most of them take no notice of any law that doesn't suit them, and won't even know when Bradford's bill becomes law.
This sort of middle-class legislation is what Americans call cherry pie and mother love: difficult to oppose. It sounds better than it is in practice. But it serves a most useful purpose for Clark's Government. The political numbers are so tight in the present Parliament that ministers dare not tackle anything meaningful that might ruffle the coalition.
The smacking debate is infinitely easier to handle than tackling the welfare scandal that has led to sickness and invalid beneficiaries rising in number, as welfare cheats find better-remunerated ways of not working. It means ministers do not need to restrain the rocketing numbers of bureaucrats delivering worsening services, who eat up money that could be returned to taxpayers.
Ministers are able to ignore the growing rebellion against the National Certificate of Educational Achievement, and don't have to confront the urgent need to foster greater parental responsibility for children.
They can overlook the really tricky issue of turning around the incentives that mostly point Maori in the direction of continuing grievance, rather than settling grievances, and then moving forward.
Lots of countries have had periods when they ate up their seed corn rather than planted for tomorrow. We did it in the 1970s and early 1980s, when we thought there were easy solutions to our declining economy that could be fixed by a regulation or three. We have been doing the same again for the better part of a decade. We are just building up problems for tomorrow, while we debate the likes of smacking legislation that will improve absolutely nothing.
http://www.salient.org.nz/features/fuck-off-sue-bradford
Don, this article that you linked to is actually anti-smacking. It is just making use of fairly extreme sarcasm.
THANKS. I TOOK THE LINK OFF..
Post a Comment